BikeTechReview.com

  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size
Home Forum
Welcome, Guest
Username Password: Remember me

Rick Murphy's Normanalized Power Thread
(1 viewing) (1) Guest

TOPIC: Rick Murphy's Normanalized Power Thread

Rick Murphy's Normanalized Power Thread 8 years, 9 months ago #23741

  • rmur
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 1088
  • Karma: 0
Ron Ruff wrote:
Some people apparently see a steady progression over several years. So... the question is... are riders who see a rapid increase in a few months, and then nothing, missing out on a significant part of their potential... or do they merely respond more quickly?

I was wondering if maybe prior training might have a big effect (I played basketball from 4-12th grade which was training of a sort), but jnovitsky was a marathon runner so he obviously had prior training.

sent you a PM Ron as after four years of things like "power number estimator gizmo" - it's purty hard to discuss training here --- while using very commonly utilized training metrics ..
GIZMO marketing specialist

Re: How much is the maximum 8 years, 9 months ago #23743

  • DMC
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 373
  • Karma: 0
rmur wrote:
after four years of things like "power number estimator gizmo" - it's purty hard to discuss training here --- while using very commonly utilized training metrics ..


Aww Come on. Sure, it is silly, if i am still allowed to drink a coke and a eat 3 big macs. But compared to a set of VO2 max efforts can you really call it "HARD" to discuss without mentioning normanalised power?

I will disclose that ever since I got a Mormonised power of 359watts for a 4hour7minute very hilly circuit race, I havnt been enamoured of the ideas usefullness.
I am a born again S.A.I.D.-ist
dmc

Re: How much is the maximum 8 years, 9 months ago #23745

  • Kirk
  • OFFLINE
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 1102
  • Karma: 2
rmur wrote:
Ron Ruff wrote:
Some people apparently see a steady progression over several years. So... the question is... are riders who see a rapid increase in a few months, and then nothing, missing out on a significant part of their potential... or do they merely respond more quickly?

I was wondering if maybe prior training might have a big effect (I played basketball from 4-12th grade which was training of a sort), but jnovitsky was a marathon runner so he obviously had prior training.

sent you a PM Ron as after four years of things like "power number estimator gizmo" - it's purty hard to discuss training here --- while using very commonly utilized training metrics ..


I'm not sure I understand what the variable power estimator gizmo has to do with training philosophy or prescription...it doesn't tell one what they actually did on a ride either. I think it is well recognized here and on the internets elsewhere that one can use gizmo power or virtual power as stand-ins and everyone understands what one is referring too.

Re: How much is the maximum 8 years, 9 months ago #23747

  • Kirk
  • OFFLINE
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 1102
  • Karma: 2
DMC wrote:
rmur wrote:
after four years of things like "power number estimator gizmo" - it's purty hard to discuss training here --- while using very commonly utilized training metrics ..


Aww Come on. Sure, it is silly, if i am still allowed to drink a coke and a eat 3 big macs. But compared to a set of VO2 max efforts can you really call it "HARD" to discuss without mentioning normanalised power?

I will disclose that ever since I got a Mormonised power of 359watts for a 4hour7minute very hilly circuit race, I havnt been enamoured of the ideas usefullness.
I am a born again S.A.I.D.-ist
dmc


NO COKES FOR YOU!

I think there's a lot of stuff like this too...do a tempo ride with some coasting and a few stop signs or a wide open rolling ride, and average power says say, 190w. Virtual power says say, 215w. Neither one is close to maximal power-duration...so I look at what drives virtual power and creates that difference and go...

...but 215w sure feels more satisfying.

Re: How much is the maximum 8 years, 9 months ago #23748

  • rmur
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 1088
  • Karma: 0
DMC wrote:
rmur wrote:
after four years of things like "power number estimator gizmo" - it's purty hard to discuss training here --- while using very commonly utilized training metrics ..


Aww Come on. Sure, it is silly, if i am still allowed to drink a coke and a eat 3 big macs. But compared to a set of VO2 max efforts can you really call it "HARD" to discuss without mentioning normanalised power?

I will disclose that ever since I got a Mormonised power of 359watts for a 4hour7minute very hilly circuit race, I havnt been enamoured of the ideas usefullness.
I am a born again S.A.I.D.-ist
dmc

okay - I guess I'm saying I'm too lazy to use long-hand where shorthand would suffice
But isn't the joke getting a tad old after 4+ yrs now?
GIZMO marketing specialist

Re: How much is the maximum 8 years, 9 months ago #23749

  • kraig
  • OFFLINE
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 3285
  • Karma: 4
rmur wrote:

okay - I guess I'm saying I'm too lazy to use long-hand where shorthand would suffice


I encourage folks to stay away from profit-motivated jargon/shorthand that a few coaches and a few power-based coaches and a small sector of the bike racing public seems to prefer these days. I mean, really, if the inventor of normanized power (thanks for the new one, DMC! )doesn't claim the stuff to be science, or scientific (i.e - he thinks it is psuedo-science?) I guess I just don't understand the appeal from an intellectual/ethical perspective.

Certainly, I can understand the jargon/psuedoscience approach from a marketing/business perspective (i.e, it becomes real appealing/easy for just about anyone to put together "training schedules using gizmo jargon" and ask for money in return...) - but real coaching is more than that, IMHO.
-kraig

Re: How much is the maximum 8 years, 9 months ago #23750

  • Kirk
  • OFFLINE
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 1102
  • Karma: 2
Kirk wrote:
I think there's a lot of stuff like this too...do a tempo ride with some coasting and a few stop signs or a wide open rolling ride, and average power says say, 190w. Virtual power says say, 215w. Neither one is close to maximal power-duration...so I look at what drives virtual power and creates that difference and go...

...but 215w sure feels more satisfying.


It's been several years now...and I'm sitll trying to understand how folks can say virtual power is an aerobic-based entity when the weighting isn't derived from aerobic markers, or why the weighting is valid as applied to power differences in general, let alone differences between between powers with linear/near-linear relationships. I'm not sure I understand how those few folks use and promote virtual power as some kind of quantitative value or "better" number without an understanding of error.

Anyone have insight into any of those questions?

Sorry for the thread diversion...but it does appear that a few folks think this stuff is real part of finding a maximum.

Re: How much is the maximum 8 years, 9 months ago #23751

  • rmur
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 1088
  • Karma: 0
yeah okay whatever .... y'all are just so much smarter than us plebs!
GIZMO marketing specialist

Re: How much is the maximum 8 years, 9 months ago #23752

  • Kirk
  • OFFLINE
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 1102
  • Karma: 2
rmur wrote:
yeah okay whatever .... y'all are just so much smarter than us plebs!


Pardon my lack of understanding and/or just plain ignorance, but do you have any insight into my questions? Have those things been communicated?

Re: How much is the maximum 8 years, 9 months ago #23753

  • Ron Ruff
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 894
  • Karma: 0
DMC wrote:
Since this topic is about "the maximum" , here is a silly (or not) thought on Conceive,Believe,Achieve and possibilities.
It's something that I 'believe' (haha - or not) has helped me break plateaus.

Question -
As a general principal, should training levels be based on

A - % of your current maximums.
B - % of your previous best maximums.
or
C - % of your not yet achieved goal target powers ?????

In practice, this may be more of a change in attitude than in training. But I will take back my "haha" and suppose this can be a significant mental factor.
I'll justify this waffle by pointing that psychology is REAL. (Even if it only ever affects study groups of other people not me - never ME!)


I've never done "structured" training. When I was younger the high intensity stuff consisted of 1 or 2 evening crits per week (in which I went for every prime and covered every attack) and Sat and Sun group hammerfests if there wasn't a race. I got a pseudo PM 5 months ago and only find it useful after the fact, but I don't like looking at it while riding. One thing it has told me is that when I am in shape, and going as hard as I can, the avg power is very consistent. I'm basing this on a TT series I did this summer where the avg power varied <2% regardless of how I felt before I did it. I was alway semi-rested though (not too hard the day before), because I wanted to do well. I was trying different pacing strategies and stuff (it's hilly), and the wind was variable, but for all practical purposes you could "set your watch" by my avg power for 8 weeks. I am always completely dead at the end.

My training regime is basically... if I'm going hard, then I'm going until my legs simply can't turn the pedals over... and no amount of gritting teeth can change that. There is no point where I say "oh... this is just too hard" or it hurts too much. I'm much more prone to overtraining than undertraining.

On the other hand, if you are thinking about affirmations or goals, that is something I've never done. I've heard that this works for some people, but it just feels wrong to me. My performance occurs in the moment, not months or years prior. I'm not saying it couldn't work... it just seems weird to set a particular number or placing goal ahead of time. Maybe I should try that...

Re: How much is the maximum 8 years, 9 months ago #23754

  • Ron Ruff
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 894
  • Karma: 0
Kirk wrote:
It's been several years now...and I'm sitll trying to understand how folks can say virtual power is an aerobic-based entity when the weighting isn't derived from aerobic markers, or why the weighting is valid as applied to power differences in general, let alone differences between between powers with linear/near-linear relationships. I'm not sure I understand how those few folks use and promote virtual power as some kind of quantitative value or "better" number without an understanding of error.

Anyone have insight into any of those questions?


It isn't based on aerobic markers... it is merely a simple way to modify power data to achieve an semi-equivalent "effort" that is more accurate than just looking at the average. Maybe the exponent should be 3 rather than 4, or maybe the time period 60 rather than 30 sec. This will obviously vary somewhat for each person. There was a long thread about this on Wattage awhile ago... and every person who had a true "NP buster" ride admitted that a significant portion of it was out of the saddle... which is another issue. Anybody who would like to test this for themselves can use a PM and do a series of intervals and see what they get.

Re: How much is the maximum 8 years, 9 months ago #23755

  • Ron Ruff
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 894
  • Karma: 0
kraig wrote:
if the inventor of normanized power (thanks for the new one, DMC!


You ruined it! It's Mormanized... not normanized.

Re: How much is the maximum 8 years, 9 months ago #23756

  • Kirk
  • OFFLINE
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 1102
  • Karma: 2
Ron Ruff wrote:
Kirk wrote:
It's been several years now...and I'm sitll trying to understand how folks can say virtual power is an aerobic-based entity when the weighting isn't derived from aerobic markers, or why the weighting is valid as applied to power differences in general, let alone differences between between powers with linear/near-linear relationships. I'm not sure I understand how those few folks use and promote virtual power as some kind of quantitative value or "better" number without an understanding of error.

Anyone have insight into any of those questions?


It isn't based on aerobic markers... it is merely a simple way to modify power data to achieve an semi-equivalent "effort" that is more accurate than just looking at the average. Maybe the exponent should be 3 rather than 4, or maybe the time period 60 rather than 30 sec. This will obviously vary somewhat for each person. There was a long thread about this on Wattage awhile ago... and every person who had a true "power number estimator gizmo buster" ride admitted that a significant portion of it was out of the saddle... which is another issue. Anybody who would like to test this for themselves can use a PM and do a series of intervals and see what they get.


It’s been suggested to me that it is an aerobic-based entity and limited by aerobic mechanisms...going so far as to say it isn’t reliable for durations less than 30 minutes because it doesn’t account for anaerobic contributions. Hence, I am confused about the basis of the weighting.

I always get a higher number than average power whether doing intervals or mixing in some coasting or just on rolling tempo rides even if there is nothing exponential about the relationship between intensities (IOW, I don't understand why folks would think an exponent is necessary to begin with, at least for intensities which don't exceed VO2max for a sufficient period of time). I also don’t understand the basis by which folks believe that a higher number is closer to the real value than a lower number other than the more satisfying part. I think examples like the one I posted above in the thread are the most common scenario for applying virtual power anyways.

Re: How much is the maximum 8 years, 9 months ago #23758

  • rmur
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 1088
  • Karma: 0
Kirk wrote:
rmur wrote:
yeah okay whatever .... y'all are just so much smarter than us plebs!


Pardon my lack of understanding and/or just plain ignorance, but do you have any insight into my questions? Have those things been communicated?

ah I'm just used to communicating without the kindly site filter. it just ain't worth the degration of having my words twisted for juvenille purposes here.
GIZMO marketing specialist

Re: How much is the maximum 8 years, 9 months ago #23759

  • Kirk
  • OFFLINE
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 1102
  • Karma: 2
rmur wrote:
Kirk wrote:
rmur wrote:
yeah okay whatever .... y'all are just so much smarter than us plebs!


Pardon my lack of understanding and/or just plain ignorance, but do you have any insight into my questions? Have those things been communicated?

ah I'm just used to communicating without the kindly site filter. it just ain't worth the degration of having my words twisted for juvenille purposes here.


Since you know how to avoid the filter and others have no trouble avoiding it, should I take that as no, you don't have insight, and no, those things have not been communicated to your knowledge?

Re: How much is the maximum 8 years, 9 months ago #23760

  • rmur
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 1088
  • Karma: 0
geez Kirk. I have so much insight that I keep forgetting half of it ... back in the good ole days ...yadda yadda ...
GIZMO marketing specialist

Re: How much is the maximum 8 years, 9 months ago #23761

  • rmur
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 1088
  • Karma: 0
Kirk wrote:
Kirk wrote:
I think there's a lot of stuff like this too...do a tempo ride with some coasting and a few stop signs or a wide open rolling ride, and average power says say, 190w. Virtual power says say, 215w. Neither one is close to maximal power-duration...so I look at what drives virtual power and creates that difference and go...

...but 215w sure feels more satisfying.


It's been several years now...and I'm sitll trying to understand how folks can say virtual power is an aerobic-based entity when the weighting isn't derived from aerobic markers, or why the weighting is valid as applied to power differences in general, let alone differences between between powers with linear/near-linear relationships. I'm not sure I understand how those few folks use and promote virtual power as some kind of quantitative value or "better" number without an understanding of error.

Smart-ass reply: we're all idiots of course
1) Why do you consider lactate to be strictly a marker of anaerobic metabolism, when lactate is continuously produced even when plenty of O2 is available?

2) Why do you believe that physiological/metabolic responses are linear below VO2max, when much/all evidence points to the contrary? of course if you consider tiny differences in power/intensity, ANY relationship looks linear. Didn't Newton or Leibniz develop some math around that?



Anyone have insight into any of those questions?

Sorry for the thread diversion...but it does appear that a few folks think this stuff is real part of finding a maximum.
GIZMO marketing specialist

Re: How much is the maximum 8 years, 9 months ago #23762

  • Kirk
  • OFFLINE
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 1102
  • Karma: 2
rmur wrote:
geez Kirk. I have so much insight that I keep forgetting half of it ... back in the good ole days ...yadda yadda ...


That's kind of like the penguin story...try to cram more and more penguins onto the iceberg and pretty soon some slip off into the sea.

Re: How much is the maximum 8 years, 9 months ago #23763

  • Kirk
  • OFFLINE
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 1102
  • Karma: 2
Smart-ass reply: we're all idiots of course
1) Why do you consider lactate to be strictly a marker of anaerobic metabolism, when lactate is continuously produced even when plenty of O2 is available?

2) Why do you believe that physiological/metabolic responses are linear below VO2max, when much/all evidence points to the contrary? of course if you consider tiny differences in power/intensity, ANY relationship looks linear. Didn't Newton or Leibniz develop some math around that?


1) I don't consider lactate to strickly be a marker of anaerobic metabolism.

2) What is all this evidence are you referring to?

Re: How much is the maximum 8 years, 9 months ago #23766

  • Ron Ruff
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 894
  • Karma: 0
Kirk wrote:
2) What is all this evidence are you referring to?


Maybe he is thinking of how poorly average power and duration predicts the level of effort... even for sub VO2 intensity. For instance a series of 5min VO2 intervals (5 min rest) will be much more taxing than riding at 1/2 VO2 for the same time period. AC's Mormanized power equation could surely be more refined... but what sort of algorithm would you propose? Average power doesn't cut it, and all efforts over a certain level are not equal either. Could you come up with a better way to gauge training stress, or do you think there is simply no reason to care about it?

Re: How much is the maximum 8 years, 9 months ago #23767

  • rmur
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 1088
  • Karma: 0
Kirk wrote:
Smart-ass reply: we're all idiots of course
1) Why do you consider lactate to be strictly a marker of anaerobic metabolism, when lactate is continuously produced even when plenty of O2 is available?

2) Why do you believe that physiological/metabolic responses are linear below VO2max, when much/all evidence points to the contrary? of course if you consider tiny differences in power/intensity, ANY relationship looks linear. Didn't Newton or Leibniz develop some math around that?


1) I don't consider lactate to strickly be a marker of anaerobic metabolism.

okay but you seemed to imply it is NOT a marker of aerobic metabolism? What is it then?

2) What is all this evidence are you referring to?
you mean aside from the walking/talking ducks ? give me some time ...
GIZMO marketing specialist

Re: How much is the maximum 8 years, 9 months ago #23768

  • Kirk
  • OFFLINE
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 1102
  • Karma: 2
rmur wrote:
Kirk wrote:
Smart-ass reply: we're all idiots of course
1) Why do you consider lactate to be strictly a marker of anaerobic metabolism, when lactate is continuously produced even when plenty of O2 is available?

2) Why do you believe that physiological/metabolic responses are linear below VO2max, when much/all evidence points to the contrary? of course if you consider tiny differences in power/intensity, ANY relationship looks linear. Didn't Newton or Leibniz develop some math around that?


1) I don't consider lactate to strickly be a marker of anaerobic metabolism.

okay but you seemed to imply it is NOT a marker of aerobic metabolism? What is it then?

2) What is all this evidence are you referring to?
you mean aside from the walking/talking ducks ? give me some time ...


I said nothing about lactate. Please do share your evidence.

Re: How much is the maximum 8 years, 9 months ago #23769

  • Kirk
  • OFFLINE
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 1102
  • Karma: 2
Ron Ruff wrote:
Kirk wrote:
2) What is all this evidence are you referring to?


Maybe he is thinking of how poorly average power and duration predicts the level of effort... even for sub VO2 intensity. For instance a series of 5min VO2 intervals (5 min rest) will be much more taxing than riding at 1/2 VO2 for the same time period. AC's Mormanized power equation could surely be more refined... but what sort of algorithm would you propose? Average power doesn't cut it, and all efforts over a certain level are not equal either. Could you come up with a better way to gauge training stress, or do you think there is simply no reason to care about it?


I'm not so sure that the average in your example is any worse than the derived higher number for the overall effort. That higher number is more satisfying though, especially since the "on's" are remembered most. IME, it is the "on" time which matters...and in terms of day to day recovery, how that "on" time relates to prior training in the context of how many kj's are burned so to say.

At best, I don't think an algorithm is necessary or adds new information.

Re: How much is the maximum 8 years, 9 months ago #23771

  • rmur
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 1088
  • Karma: 0
) I don't consider lactate to strickly be a marker of anaerobic metabolism.

okay but you seemed to imply it is NOT a marker of aerobic metabolism? What is it then?

2) What is all this evidence are you referring to?
you mean aside from the walking/talking ducks ? give me some time ...

I said nothing about lactate. Please do share your evidence


okay. here are some links I managed to pull together ..

(1) Ventilation is non-linearly related to exercise intensity, e.g.:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3602595

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1433461


(2) Blood or plasma lactate concentration is non-linearly related to exercise intensity, e.g.:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3597269

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3130988

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1433461

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9562362


(3) Blood ammonia concentration is non-linearly related to exercise intensity, e.g.:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/598363

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10190765

(4) Blood or plasma norepineprhine, epinephrine , growth hormone, cortisol, and beta endorphin concentrations are non-linearly related to exercise intensity, e.g.:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1233217

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8063464

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18642761

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12369738

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1553453



(5) Muscle glycogen utilization and glucose concentration, production, and utilization are non-linearly related to exercise intensity, e.g.:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10367721

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2675629

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/5129319

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8214047

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10797133

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4278539

(6) Muscle oxygenation is non-linearly related to exercise intensity, e.g.:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9809843
GIZMO marketing specialist

Re: How much is the maximum 8 years, 9 months ago #23772

  • Lindy
  • OFFLINE
  • Senior Boarder
  • Posts: 45
  • Karma: 0
Kirk wrote:
Ron Ruff wrote:
Kirk wrote:
2) What is all this evidence are you referring to?


Maybe he is thinking of how poorly average power and duration predicts the level of effort... even for sub VO2 intensity. For instance a series of 5min VO2 intervals (5 min rest) will be much more taxing than riding at 1/2 VO2 for the same time period. AC's Mormanized power equation could surely be more refined... but what sort of algorithm would you propose? Average power doesn't cut it, and all efforts over a certain level are not equal either. Could you come up with a better way to gauge training stress, or do you think there is simply no reason to care about it?


I'm not so sure that the average in your example is any worse than the derived higher number for the overall effort. That higher number is more satisfying though, especially since the "on's" are remembered most. IME, it is the "on" time which matters...and in terms of day to day recovery, how that "on" time relates to prior training in the context of how many kj's are burned so to say.

At best, I don't think an algorithm is necessary or adds new information.


I think tracking duration and intensity with total time per level is the best indication of the training where the formula gives a single number to track. Within bounds the number probably does what it claims, but even AC says it does not reflect the makeup of the workout. Kraig's raise the left, fill the right tracking does a better job of that with the focus on time at power.
Based on my stint doing computer performance testing, most people get overwhelmed and are looking for the single number/percentage to track so if something comes close they are satisfied. I suspect Kraig sees the same thing on wind tunnel results - give me the time delta for 40k and don't confuse me with exponential curves or skews.
For fun with numbers doing 30 seconds at 2xFTP is the same Morman points as 8 minutes at FTP, apply this to a workout for a kilo/sprinter and see where things break down at the limits.
Time to create page: 1.07 seconds

Poll

Which type of tire is more aerodynamic?